Communication: judgment No. 0150 of 2021

IDENTIFIER
62021CA0150
LANGUAGE
English
COURT
Court of Justice of the European Union
AG OPINION
NO
REFERENCES MADE
3
REFERENCED
1
DOCUMENT TYPE
Communication: judgment

Judgment



30.5.2022   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/16


Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 7 April 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla Łodzi-Śródmieścia w Łodzi — Poland) — Proceedings relating to the recognition and enforcement of a financial penalty imposed on D.B.

(Case C-150/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Mutual recognition - Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA - Enforcement of financial penalties - Article 1(a)(ii) - Decision imposing a financial penalty issued by an administrative authority - Decision open to appeal to a public prosecutor, subject to instructions from the Minister for Justice - Subsequent appeal before a court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters)

(2022/C 213/19)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy dla Łodzi-Śródmieścia w Łodzi

Parties to the main proceedings

Defendant: D.B.

Intervening party: Prokuratura Rejonowa Łódź-Bałuty

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1(a)(ii) of Council Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA of 24 February 2005 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties, as amended by Council Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA of 26 February 2009, must be interpreted as meaning that a final decision requiring a financial penalty to be paid by a natural person, adopted by an authority of the issuing Member State other than a court in respect of a criminal offence under the law of the issuing Member State, constitutes a ‘decision’, within the meaning of that provision, where the legislation of that Member State provides that an appeal against that decision is to be examined first by a public prosecutor placed under the hierarchical authority of the Minister for Justice and subsequently, if that public prosecutor adopts a decision dismissing that appeal, a court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters may be seised by the person concerned, provided that access to that court is not made subject to conditions which make it impossible or excessively difficult.


(1)  OJ C 329, 16.8.2021.



Citations

Sign up for a free moonlit.ai™ account to access all citing documents.